Again (excuse me if I just beat the horse once more) we are exactly 99.9% sure of which "MUSCLE" sculpts were on each tree, and are at most 90% sure of which colors each were made in (we still need photo evidence of a good portion). We are officially 10% sure of where the Non-Muscle Sculpts go, if that.
In regards to which colors each tree was made in, so far, there have been a few instances when the MDB data indicated a particular tree should have figures in, say, Orange, and Arforbes didn't have any in Orange.
Furthermore, the MDB only shows a few, 1 or 2, of these figures found.
Arforbes not having
any in the tree in said color and only 1 or 2 being reported as found on MDB means they could very well be mistakes.
I've been on the fence whether to list these rows as "Rare" or "Not Made." It's kind of like choosing the lesser of two evils, cause it would be unfortunate to be wrong either way.
A good example is
Part Five, Trees 1 and 2.Now, this isn't really a problem if several people have listed the figures as found -- earning the color an "uncommon" or "common" listing -- and arforbes doesn't have one in said color. I'm really just concerned about the colors labeled "rare."
Perhaps I'll make a new button called, simply, "Uncertain."
Any thoughts?
Also, I
was placing the Non-MUSCLE sculpts at the end of trees where they seemed to fit. However, right away with part two, this became difficult because even if, say, there were two trees of 4 and two Non-MUSCLE sculpts, I could guess that each tree got one Non-MUSCLE sculpt... but I really wouldn't know which sculpt went with which tree for certain.
Thus, I figured I'd just list all Non-MUSCLE sculpts at the bottom and allow readers to use their own judgement. Does that maketh sense?